Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Implementation Bridge - Future Phase Suggestions Planning Staff Comment <br />61. <br />As people become accustomed to this new document it will be <br />important to provide different kinds of helpful guidance for users <br />to find the sections of the document that are pertinent to their <br />needs. The “Comparative Table” is quite helpful, and is an example <br />of the guidance that will be needed during the transition. Having <br />some kind of on-line search mechanism would be helpful. Perhaps <br />that is already under development. <br />The UDO has been in use (and on-line) since April 2011 and staff has not <br />received complaints about the document. The County has made the <br />decision to begin to use MuniCode to maintain its ordinances so the UDO <br />will soon be converted to MuniCode's format. <br />62.At what point in time will we define metrics of whether the UDO is <br />succeeding? <br />63. <br />It would be really nice if the final document could be accessed and <br />indexed electronically rather than printed, a hyperlink format. For <br />instance, clicking on a term and the definition pops up. <br />The UDO has been available on-line in a PDF bookmarked format since <br />shortly after its adoption. The County recently made the decision to <br />begin to use MuniCode to maintain its ordinances so the UDO will soon <br />be converted to MuniCode's format. It is staff's understanding that some <br />hyperlinking may be part of MuniCode's format. <br />64.Identifying Comprehensive Plan policies that relate to UDO <br />updates. <br />All amendments that have been made to the UDO have included specific <br />Comprehensive Plan policies that support the amendment. <br />65. <br />No mention of Town of Hillsborough interlocal agreement. Add a <br />footnote or a new section. [Note: references to the Orange County- <br />Hillsborough Interlocal Agreement should be added when <br />Zoning/UDO-related items are formally adopted. At this point, <br />neither a joint land use plan nor joint development regulations <br />have been adopted]. <br />Work on a joint land use plan was initiated in September 2012 and the <br />Joint Land Use Plan was heard at the Sep. 2013 QPH. Text will be added <br />to the UDO as necessary as items move through the adoption process. <br />66.Section 1.6.2 (A), Is a 1-year hiatus long enough? <br />67.Section 1.7.2, "Agriculture" should be mentioned somewhere <br />within the discussion of elements. <br />68.Section 2.2.7 (C), Why treat withdrawal of an application as <br />denial? <br />89